Getting radical change

8 percent opt for Libertarian or Green. That seems much higher than I've seen before at anytime among registered voters:

If you had the choice in your congressional district, would you be more likely to vote for a (ROTATE:)

Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, or Green Party…candidate for Congress?
Republican candidate  41
Democratic candidate 44
Libertarian candidate   5
Green Party candidate   3
Not sure  7

That's via the WSJ-NBC polling out yesterday. Gallup had a poll a few weeks ago that showed the "Call for Third Party" poll. An Oct Hill poll found something even stronger numbers, and from the analysis:

 “That’s probably the strongest number I’ve seen in a poll of people in America saying that they're interested in a third party,” said pollster Mark Penn.

“There’s a record number of Independents and a record number of people looking for a possible third party,” he said. “And that’s a big finding. There’s an opportunity here.”

The Hill’s poll was conducted by Penn Schoen Berland, which surveyed 4,047 likely voters in 10 open districts. The overall sample has a margin of error of plus or minus 1.5 percent.

“I think there’s a greater potential for a third party than perhaps [at] any time in our history,” said Mark McKinnon, a Republican strategist and former adviser to George W. Bush. “There is a very broad level of dissatisfaction throughout the electorate — right, left and middle.

“I think what’s happened goes beyond general dissatisfaction with the economy,” he added. “They want a new way — they want to feel empowered again.”

Here is an insightful article into why "Had enough?" has basically become the default slogan for recent elections. I don't see that changing:

When we are stuck in a bad place, whether that bad place is a marriage, a traffic jam, or a weak economy, it is very tempting to try something new. Psychologists call this the action bias—and it turns out to have surprisingly broad ramifications.

When a company starts losing money, or a whole industry starts losing ground because of a new technology, most of us follow leaders who call for revolutionary change—even if no one really knows what change is needed. Leaders who advocate the status quo look like dinosaurs.

This is why tough times produce radical measures, radical leaders, and radical change. The call for revolution sounds weird in good times, but when things are bad, upending the status quo feels irresistible.

I don't think that most Democrats understand how terrible Obama's re-elect looks at the moment. There's a sort of denial at work, both because the '10 results are not in and with the hope that Palin gets the nomination making all things possible. But he's not looking good at all:

The Oct. 14-17 Gallup poll also finds that, at this point in his presidency, 39% of Americans believe Obama deserves re-election and 54% say he does not. Earlier this year, between 46% and 48% of Americans said Obama should be re-elected.

The current results for Obama are remarkably similar to what Gallup measured for Clinton in October 1994, at which time 38% of Americans thought he was worthy of a second term as president and 57% disagreed. That was just before Clinton's party lost its congressional majority in the 1994 elections, but two years later voters re-elected Clinton by a comfortable margin.

By comparison, in September 2002, 62% of Americans thought George W. Bush deserved re-election. Two years after his party's strong showing in the 2002 midterms, Bush won a narrow victory over John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.

What that tells is that its too early to tell. But the landscape around the corner looks like continued radical upheaval.

Tags: (all tags)



Obama's 2012 campaign is not a germaine topic

This upcoming election is not a referendum on the president, it's a referendum on the Democratically controlled Senate.


The house worked fine, it did well. The senate, however, was alot of monkey business.

People are voting on the issues more than anything - at least, those that are going to show up.

What would be nice, would be a discussion of those issues.

by Trey Rentz 2010-10-21 02:47PM | 0 recs

So, Obama's numbers are similar to what Clinton's (and probably Reagan's) numbers were at this point?


TeH sky iz falling!


Seriously, though.  Obama wins...Another democrat is nominated and wins/loses, a republican wins.  It DOES NOT MATTER AT THIS POINT.  I am going to support democrats who deserve my support (including president Obama) and oppose democrats who do not deserve my support...largely concentrating on upcoming races, such as my gubernatoral and congressional (and state house and senate) races.

Jesus, man...the annointed one loses a democratic nomination and you come totally fucking unglued.  Seek help.

by lojasmo 2010-10-21 08:07PM | 0 recs
Sure it looks awful now. No doubt.

If election were held today Obama would lose Ohio, probably PA, and Fl.   So sure he would be electoral toast. 

But so what?   What can we do about it.   I am not a historian, but I read where Reagan and Clinton had slightly lower approvals at this same point in time.    The fact is we don't know what will play out in the next Congress, the next year, or in the GOP primaries.  

I am not a political consultant.   But I do hope that Obama and the Democrats don't have a "now it time to our differences aside and get down to work moment."   Hopefully they will take a que from the Republicans and go hard and go nasty, and challenge Republicans in the House to pass legisation they can run on in '12.  

But at any rate, it all has to play out and we have to see were sitting in Nov. / Dec. '11 to get a better feel of the '12 landscape.   I am not prepared, now, to just say the heck with it and get down about '12 when the '10 results are not even in yet.  

by RichardFlatts 2010-10-22 11:28AM | 0 recs
Only an Idiot would NOT take Obama's team to task for this mess

I'm not going to list the "Non" things that the Obama team didn't do--that is a long list.

Obama himself is a terrible for the Democratic party. I think its just that his ego is all about his needs and not the parties. But lately some one must have whispered in his ear that he is the one NOW at risk should the Republicraps take control of the House.  He now realizes (I think), that they plan to impeach him or at least make a run at impeaching him. Pelozi should have impeached Bush in 2007 (she walked away from the chance even though the same GOP that tried to impeach Clinton insisted that the Congress should not do that). Well, you can bet that should they take over Congress, these same Republicans who begged for mercy for Bush will definitely be out to get Obama. They think he is an uppity black who is out of his place and its high time to put him back in it. Just yesterday, Darrell Issa (R-California) said that he is ready to get the impeachment process going. I think the first thing that's going to happen is that Ken Starr will get his chance to nail Obama starting in January. Funny, how the GOP runs around yelling how they need to get elected so they can get the country going but the only thing they have planned so far is to save the rich tax breaks and to impeach Obama.

Obama probably can see that he is going to be in big trouble and NOW he needs the Democrats to keep Congress although that hasn't been important to him before. But remember life in Washington is all about HIM as he views it. Only when he needs the Democrats to save his ass does he get out and work the campaigns. He should have been campaigning for Dems for more than 2 months now but he was too busy attending social functions and greeting dignitaries at the White House. Well, the first dignitary he will get to see in January could very well be KEN STARR and his team of miscreates.

by hddun2008 2010-10-22 06:57PM | 0 recs
It is about Obama

He's made it so.

by jeffroby 2010-10-24 01:12AM | 0 recs

Why does change have to be "radical".  


Americans don't like "radical".  Which is why radical Republicans call themselves conservative. 

by RichardFlatts 2010-10-28 10:41AM | 0 recs
To Me

It just seems to me that the Obama voters of 2008 are looking new venues to vote for.  This spike in 3rd parties is just a testament to how close and important the swing voter were and will be in this frontier of elections.  

by jeffrtho 2010-10-29 05:28PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads